Simple SummaryGHGs emissions are relevant in evaluating environmental impact of farming systems. Methane (CH4) produced by enteric fermentation accounts for half of all anthropogenic emissions of GHGs in Uruguay, where ruminant production is based on year round grazing of forages. Here we compared milk production and CH4 emissions by dairy cows grazing two contrasting mixed pastures (rich in legumes or rich in grasses) using the SF6 tracer technique adapted to collect breath samples over 5-days periods. There were no differences in milk or CH4 production between the contrasting pastures, probably because of the high herbage allowance that enabled selective grazing by cows.AbstractUnderstanding the impact of changing pasture composition on reducing emissions of GHGs in dairy grazing systems is an important issue to mitigate climate change. The aim of this study was to estimate daily CH4 emissions of dairy cows grazing two mixed pastures with contrasting composition of grasses and legumes: L pasture with 60% legumes on Dry Matter (DM) basis and G pasture with 75% grasses on DM basis. Milk production and CH4 emissions were compared over two periods of two weeks during spring using eight lactating Holstein cows in a 2 × 2 Latin square design. Herbage organic matter intake (HOMI) was estimated by chromic oxide dilution and herbage organic matter digestibility (OMD) was estimated by faecal index. Methane emission was estimated by using the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer technique adapted to collect breath samples over 5-day periods. OMD (0.71) and HOMI (15.7 kg OM) were not affected by pasture composition. Milk production (20.3 kg/d), milk fat yield (742 g/d) and milk protein yield (667 g/d) were similar for both pastures. This may be explained by the high herbage allowance (30 kg DM above 5 cm/cow) which allowed the cows to graze selectively, in particular in grass sward. Similarly, methane emission expressed as absolute value (368 g/d or 516 L/d) or expressed as methane yield (6.6% of Gross Energy Intake (GEI)) was not affected by treatments. In conclusion, at high herbage allowance, the quality of the diet selected by grazing cows did not differ between pastures rich in legumes or rich in grasses, and therefore there was no effect on milk or methane production.
Enteric methane (CH4) emissions are directly related to the quantity and type of feed intake. Existing mitigation strategies, for example, the addition of legumes to grass-based diets and increased use of grains, have been thoroughly researched and applied in different production systems. In this paper, we propose a need to expand the capacity to mitigate enteric CH4 emissions in cattle under grazing conditions. The objective of this paper was to contribute to evaluate a mitigation strategy under grazing conditions of using contrasting levels of pasture quality. The study was performed with 20 heifers twice during the year: winter and spring. Each season, the study employed a crossover design with two treatments and two 5-day measurement periods. The treatments were two pastures with different nutritional values, including a pasture with a low quality (70% of neutral detergent fibre, 1% of ether extract, 8% of non-fibre carbohydrates), 9% of crude protein, 35% of dry matter digestibility and a pasture with a high quality (42% neutral detergent fibre, 1.3% ether extract, 24% non-fibre carbohydrates, 21% crude protein and 63% dry matter digestibility). Enteric CH4 emissions were measured with sulfur hexafluoride tracer technique. The dry matter intake (kg/day) was measured indirectly using titanium dioxide as an external marker. CH4 emissions from animals grazing the high-quality pasture were 14% lower expressed as % of gross energy intake, and 11% lower expressed by unit of dry matter intake (g CH4/kg). These results quantitative showed the alternative to mitigate CH4 emissions from grazing bovines exclusively through the improvement of the forage quality offered.
The objective of this study was to quantify the emissions of enteric CH4 from growing Hereford steers raised under feedlot conditions based on contrasting levels of residual feed intake (RFI). A repeated measurements experiment was conducted over 20 d to determine CH4 production from two groups of nine Hereford steers, with contrasting RFI values (mean ± SD): low RFI (LRFI group; −0.78 ± 0.22 kg DMI/d) vs. high RFI (HRFI group; 0.83 ± 0.34 kg DMI/d). Steers were selected from a larger contemporary population in which the RFI was evaluated. Steers were maintained under confined conditions with ad libitum access to water and feed, comprising a total mixed ration of 55% sorghum silage, 21% barley silage, 21% corn grain, and 3% protein–mineral–vitamin–premix, provided twice a day. Before the beginning of CH4 measurements, the live weight of both groups of animals was determined, which on average (±SEM) was 357.0 ± 5.11 and 334.0 ± 10.17 kg in the LRFI and HRFI groups, respectively. Methane emission (g/d) was measured on each animal with the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer technique, during two consecutive periods of 5 d. Individual daily intake and feeding behavior characteristics were measured using a GrowSafe automated feeding system (Model 6000, GrowSafe Systems Ltd, Airdrie, Alberta, Canada). Methanogens in the ruminal content were quantified using quantitative polymerase chain reaction with primers targeting the mcrA gene. Methane emission was near 27% lower in animals with LRFI when expressed in absolute terms (g/d; 26.8%; P = 0.009), by unit of dry matter intake (g CH4/kg; 27.9%, P = 0.021), or as % of gross energy intake (26.7%; P = 0.027). These differences could not be explained by differences in amount of total of methanogens (average = 9.82 log10 units; P = 0.857). However, there were some differences in animal feeding behavior that could explain these differences (e.g., LRFI animals tended to spend less time in feeders). Our results suggest that, in Hereford steers, the selection by RFI values is a promising mitigation strategy for the reduction of the emission of enteric CH4.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.